CC&Rs are substitute for thought.

[W2IBC]

A friend of mine (who is also a ham incidentally) lived in a CC&R and was on the bomb squad for the King County Sheriff.
He was always being called out from home so he had to drive the well marked bomb squad van home all the time. It didn't hardly fit in the garage and it wasn't long before he had to deal with complaints of it being parked in the driveway overnight against the CC&R rules.
You think that the neighborhood would LIKE to have a marked police van out there where the occasional ne'r-do-well would see it and go the other way perhaps, but I guess not.

well. then id say for the cops.. when a bs call comes in.. say loud music ect comes from that street.. then the cops should just let it ride for about 3 hours.

[N8MSA]

I like the way this thread is going. Why fight the HOA morons? They are ready for such a fight....so just bypass them. Moving, stealth antennas, car rigs...all these things defeat them with nary a fight.

That's the problem with anti-freedom people, they are very narrow minded and can't fathom that people would do any of the above, so they never notice when people do.

I couldn't agree more. The best way to deal with this issue is to "vote with your wallet", and (regardless of whether you're a ham or not) simply not buy into a neighborhood with deed restrictions. I will never knowingly enter into a contract that gives my neighbors the legal authority to tell me what I can and can't do on my property.

There have been, in every area that I have I lived in (or considered living in), alternatives to accepting CC&Rs. Most of the people that I know personally that gripe about this issue tell a similar story: "I glanced at the CC&Rs and didn't like them much, but the house [had a bigger deck] [is closer to the freeway] [has such a nice view] [ad infinitum]." This isn't a "ham thing" - they traded something for their freedom, plain and simple.

[KI4NGN]

I like the way this thread is going. Why fight the HOA morons? They are ready for such a fight....so just bypass them. Moving, stealth antennas, car rigs...all these things defeat them with nary a fight.

That's the problem with anti-freedom people, they are very narrow minded and can't fathom that people would do any of the above, so they never notice when people do.

"HOA morons"? The HOA is comprised of EVERYONE who signed the HOA contract: they ARE the association, and they ELECT those to represent them.

and yet again (what is it with some of you?), when you sign a legal contract voluntarily agreeing to restrictions, there is no "anti-freedom" involved.

[K1VSK]

"HOA morons"? The HOA is comprised of EVERYONE who signed the HOA contract: they ARE the association, and they ELECT those to represent them.

and yet again (what is it with some of you?), when you sign a legal contract voluntarily agreeing to restrictions, there is no "anti-freedom" involved.

Logic plays no part of this entirely emotional argument.
It's ludicrous that most of the comments here want government intervention when it suits their needs yet they scream about intrusive, wasteful and ineffective government as though the hypocrisy isn't jaw-dropping.

That we have a tiny, obscure and arguably antiquated hobby isn't a logical or defensible reason to obviate the restrictions the majority of the residents in a HOA want and agreed to.

All I read here are a bunch of parenthetical and emotional rants but no one has yet provided a sound, well-thought argument why the FCC should set aside consensual restrictions which protect the property values of the vast majority of people.

Note - please don't focus further on the last statement regarding property vales as that is an unequivocal benefit. It's all about the FCC having no compelling reason to intercede and nobody has provided a single responsive comment to that.

[KA5QXY]

"HOA morons"? The HOA is comprised of EVERYONE who signed the HOA contract: they ARE the association, and they ELECT those to represent them.

and yet again (what is it with some of you?), when you sign a legal contract voluntarily agreeing to restrictions, there is no "anti-freedom" involved.

CC&Rs are deed restrictions and run with the land. It is not an HOA contract. Buy the land get the restrctions.

[WB2WIK]

Hi Steve. Tried to work you earlier tonight but you could not hear me? Perhaps you need a better antenna. Seriously, I've worked a lot of folks from my restricted neighborhood with low wire antennas and verticals. Just not you.

I hear everyone fine. Problem is, I get multiple calls and only answer one.

Last evening I called one CQ and had a few QSOs in a row. Never had to call CQ again, people just call. Then I had to leave the shack and didn't come back.

Sorry to miss you.

[WB2WIK]

Not to mention the overwhelming majority of those who do buy into them are not hams and could care less about it.
Hams probably comprise a very small percentage of homeowners overall.

Very small, for sure. 700K hams in a country with over 300 million people. AFAIK of the 700K hams, at least half of them aren't active anyway and probably don't care. Makes us an even smaller minority.

However...I was an HOA President for a year, back in the late 80s, and under the By-Laws we had, the HOA could do almost anything we wanted as long as we had a vote at membership meeting with a quorum. Some things could be changed by simple majority vote, some needed 2/3 and some needed 3/4, based on the By-Laws.

I was the only ham in the entire HOA, so when people expressed dissatisfaction with restrictions, other than myself, none of them were thinking anything about ham radio. I went to meet every single homeowner/member as I was "running" for office (which almost nobody wanted anyway -- it's an unpaid position!). Meeting them all took weeks; I was out every single night for 3-4 hours, walking door to door.

When I sat down to discuss the HOA with them all, nearly everyone expressed some level of dissatisfaction not with the HOA per se, but with all the restrictions. And of course the restrictions were only enforced by the HOA, since there's nobody else to enforce them. People hated that they couldn't change the fences around their patios. They hated that they had to all have white (as viewed from outside) curtains and draperies. They hated that they couldn't raise flowers above the height of their patio fences. They hated that we would lock the gates to the pool and spa at 11 PM on weeknights. They really hated the guard gates which were placed at the driveway entrances. They hated a lot of stuff. Nothing to do with antennas, everything to do with lifestyle freedom.

So I made really, really sure we had a quorum at the next open meeting (and we did), and I proposed we vote to completely ignore the CC&Rs in place. That wouldn't eradicate them; they'd still exist. We'd just pretend they didn't. This passed easily with about a 7/8 vote of the membership. We elected to "shelve" the restrictions for six months, to see what happened. If, after six months, people were unhappy with the relaxation, a simple vote could put the restrictions back in place.

That was 23 years ago. I'm not there anymore, but they never voted the restriction enforcement back in. There are no more guard gates. The place looks like a million bucks, and like a "real" neighborhood, now. People have different colored window dressings, different kinds of garage doors, different kinds of patio fences, and gardens! Unbelievable what an improvement simply "ignoring" the covenants made.

The HOA still exists, of course. They pay for all the maintenance, landscaping, driveway re-paving and everything else in the common areas. So, the HOA still serves a purpose. They just chose to ignore the covenants. Nice job, folks.

[K0RGR]

Whatever the particulars, we can't hope for any kind of government granted regulatory relief. So, we will just have to continue to learn new ways to cope with the problem.

I agree that the CC+R's are a problem. The only real glimmer of hope I see is if more people return to outside TV antennas and demand to be allowed to do so. Cable TV is not cheap, and we've learned to live without it. We do have 'cable' for high speed internet, which is a major source of entertainment for us now. Almost all of the cable shows we watched are available on the 'net. My omni directional TV antenna 10 feet above the roof receives stations from Iowa, Wisconsin and SE MN - over 20 of them. Most of what I watch is on PBS anyway, and I get lots of those. I even get to watch blacked-out Vikings games from the WI stations!

I've tried hamming from inside apartments and townhouses, and it was never that much fun for me. It always seems that I get the apartment next door to the guy with the Jacob's Ladder going all the time. During those years, most of my hamming was mobile - and a lot of it still is.
Of course, that's considered too weird and dangerous by many people, so we see new laws threatening to take that away, too.

Eventually, all of that old housing stock where antennas are permitted will be torn down to build new houses where they aren't.

If ham radio is going to survive, we're going to have to learn to cope with the situation. I think we have the tools. We can rebuild it. We can make it better than it ever was... but it will take energy and imagination.

[KA3JLW]

Whatever the particulars, we can't hope for any kind of government granted regulatory relief. So, we will just have to continue to learn new ways to cope with the problem.

I agree that the CC+R's are a problem. The only real glimmer of hope I see is if more people return to outside TV antennas and demand to be allowed to do so. Cable TV is not cheap, and we've learned to live without it. We do have 'cable' for high speed internet, which is a major source of entertainment for us now. Almost all of the cable shows we watched are available on the 'net. My omni directional TV antenna 10 feet above the roof receives stations from Iowa, Wisconsin and SE MN - over 20 of them. Most of what I watch is on PBS anyway, and I get lots of those. I even get to watch blacked-out Vikings games from the WI stations!

I've tried hamming from inside apartments and townhouses, and it was never that much fun for me. It always seems that I get the apartment next door to the guy with the Jacob's Ladder going all the time. During those years, most of my hamming was mobile - and a lot of it still is.
Of course, that's considered too weird and dangerous by many people, so we see new laws threatening to take that away, too.

Eventually, all of that old housing stock where antennas are permitted will be torn down to build new houses where they aren't.

If ham radio is going to survive, we're going to have to learn to cope with the situation. I think we have the tools. We can rebuild it. We can make it better than it ever was... but it will take energy and imagination.

Agreed, sadly.

I would LOVE to see remote antenna farms available on a pay-as-you go basis. "but you can't make money in ham radio!" - horse hockey. Companies sell antennas, there's no reason they can't rent them.

The same software that manages remote access could manage rental time, either reserved or ad-hoc. Maybe there are some rule changes that come of it (like dxcc must be from an antenna within 50 miles of your station)

I know this is logically possible, I don't know if it is currently done. It would be at least part of a solution.

[W3WN]

Logic plays no part of this entirely emotional argument.
It's ludicrous that most of the comments here want government intervention when it suits their needs yet they scream about intrusive, wasteful and ineffective government as though the hypocrisy isn't jaw-dropping.

That we have a tiny, obscure and arguably antiquated hobby isn't a logical or defensible reason to obviate the restrictions the majority of the residents in a HOA want and agreed to.

All I read here are a bunch of parenthetical and emotional rants but no one has yet provided a sound, well-thought argument why the FCC should set aside consensual restrictions which protect the property values of the vast majority of people.

Note - please don't focus further on the last statement regarding property vales as that is an unequivocal benefit. It's all about the FCC having no compelling reason to intercede and nobody has provided a single responsive comment to that.

In most new construction communities, CC&R's are imposed by the builders. Some of those restrictions may come as part of their deal to purchase the land from the previous owner(s), some may be placed for their own reasons.

The problem is that too many builders are known to have used a one-size-fits-all boiler-plate for many CC&R issues. In the case of most antenna restrictions, that portion the boiler-plate can be traced back to (a) people who did not care for the look of outdoor TV towers and/or antennas, and/or (b) deals made with CATV and similar companies, where the builder was paid a fee or received other consideration(s) in return for permitting the CATV companies to pre-wire the development... and then essentially force the home buyers to pay for cable in order to receive TV programming.
The irony, which I don't think I've seen mentioned while skimming this thread, is that one of the reasons behind the eventual FCC rules regarding the OTARD antennas (and partial federal over-ride of CC&R/HOA rules) was because of this very point. I say "irony" because the language used is a prohibition on most or all antennas, even though the intent was to restrict TV antennas; ham (and to a lesser extent, CB & SW) antennas was most likely a minor consideration if it was one at all.

So, while the original intent of some of these CC&R restrictions was to ban outdoor TV antennas, those are now the very antennas (including satellite dishes) that CC&R's are extremeley limited in covering. But those in the Amateur service are suffering from the unintended consequences of overly broad language and a lack of a mandate from the FCC.

In a similar fashion, my understanding is that many HOA restrictions come about because either the builder (again, dealing with a language boiler plate) set down the original guidelines, again, one-size-fits-all-situation... or property owners in the community who joined the HOA board, and eventually gained power, are using their own desires regarding safety and esthetics to determine what they think is best for all. Frankly, I would not expect FCC relief on this issue. The relief will only come when those amateurs who are severely restricted by arbitrary or arcane HOA rules do something about it. Either by joining the HOA governing board (as many have said they've done) and worked to overturn the rules... or by leaving.